Trixology

General Category => General Computing/Macintosh => Topic started by: xairbusdriver on May 29, 2016, 02:46:37 PM

Title: Longest computer up time?
Post by: xairbusdriver on May 29, 2016, 02:46:37 PM
Maybe should be a Poll? I recently modified a script I use to calculate the "Computer Uptime". I edited out both the Year and Month bits for too different reasons.
1. "Months" are not a fixed size (at least in the Gregorian Calendar), without a lot of calculations about the current "month" and the past ones, plus considering Leap year and monitoring for the centuries and then... It's not impossible, just tedious! But, Hey! This is just a hobby! [lol]
2. How many times have I been able to run any of my computers, without stop, for even close to a year?! [rolleyes2]

So, the question is; What is the longest time you've had a nonstop running computer? Second question might be, who cares?! Apple pretty much guarantees we won't see more than 365 days without at least one shutdown. [rockon]
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: Steve on May 29, 2016, 11:25:52 PM
Generally 45-60 days unless Stu is busy making frequent WeatherCat changes. Occasional longer. Usually a restart is due to an OS upgrade, or electrical outage. I remember a 5 month run several years ago, so that may be the longest. I don't really keep track.
Title: UNIX can run for years (Re: Longest computer up time?)
Post by: elagache on May 29, 2016, 11:56:48 PM
Dear X-Air, Steve, and WeatherCat endurance runners,

So, the question is; What is the longest time you've had a nonstop running computer? Second question might be, who cares?! Apple pretty much guarantees we won't see more than 365 days without at least one shutdown. [rockon]

When I had a LINUX server, I tried very hard not to restart the computer as this was one of the expectations of a good UNIX system administrator.  Since I never knew if I might land such a job, I tried to run my server as I might be asked to run a companies server.  Under those conditions, a computer can easily run more than one year.

You are correct, Apple seems extremely anxious to make sure none of us ever try that again.  Still, I can run for several months on the house's server.  Right now it is at a modest 64 days:

(http://www.canebas.org/misc/Capto_images/Canebas%20uptime%202016-05-29.png)

People who run WeatherCat on a dedicated Mac can rack up really remarkable uptimes.  Before WeatherCat, LWC ran for a think close to a year without being disturbed.

So do honestly answer your question, if you want to solve the problem for yourself - no worries.  However, if you want to create something that you would share with others, yes you should consider long time intervals at achievable. 

Cheers, Edouard
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: xairbusdriver on May 30, 2016, 01:09:01 AM
My bad (again!) for not limiting my run time question to at least consumer machines running WC. Who cares about other weather reporting apps?! [lol]

I can easily reinstate the "Years" display, if or when it appears that might be approaching. For now, "Days" should suffice, until we reach OS Z 25.9... [tup] By that time, we may be using UAT (Universal Astrophysical Time).
Title: OSX < WC
Post by: dfw_pilot on May 30, 2016, 05:55:16 AM
Sadly, I think WC can run much longer than OS X can while remaining stable.

With today's hairballs in the Big Cat's OS (http://macperformanceguide.com/topics/topic-AppleCoreRot.html), restarting every few weeks is probably a good idea.
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: xairbusdriver on May 30, 2016, 04:54:54 PM
Ironically, a new release version of WC is announced today. Fortunately, we don't have to re-boot the hardware...  [tup]

You need to stop reading those "Complaints" sites! You know they never have anything good to say, no matter the subject!

Now, go visit the nearest Apple Store (or two), they're offering free Kool-Aid today.
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: Blicj11 on May 30, 2016, 05:25:41 PM
Interesting question; thanks for asking. I used to run several months at a time. But these days, I reboot OS X at least monthly, sometimes more frequently, as that seems to eliminate unexpected crashes of one or another application. I always reboot the machine when I download a new version of WeatherCat.
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: Bull Winkus on May 31, 2016, 04:27:59 AM
Quote
I always reboot the machine when I download a new version of WeatherCat.

Me too, Blick. It's like when you move a piece of furniture, you end up sweeping and vacuuming everywhere. Or, if you're already outside and sweaty, and you see a few things you've been putting off, it's time to get after it. Heck, if you're going to have to restart WC, then give it a fresh foundation to work from.

To answer the OP's question, I don't really think about it, but sans power disruption, WC upgrade, and OS X upgrade, it can go months. That rarely happens however, due to the frequency of power disruptions, WC upgrades, and OS X upgrades (but mostly power disruptions). One time, after a prolonged power outage, I was so glad to get power back, after resetting clocks and restarting my 4 UPS's, I forgot to turn on the WC computer before going back to work/play on the main iMac. It was 2 days later before I noticed. I really should let it run a screen saver. Now, it just goes dark.

 [cheers1]

I used to be a simple man living a simple life enjoying simple things. That was before I got my first computer, though.
Title: Wisdom for the 21st century (Re: Longest computer up time?)
Post by: elagache on May 31, 2016, 11:26:33 PM
Dear Herb and WeatherCat disciples of . . . . . Murphy's law!

I used to be a simple man living a simple life enjoying simple things. That was before I got my first computer, though.

Perhaps you will be moved by this quote that can perhaps be attributed to Paul R. Ehrlich: (https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Talk:Paul_R._Ehrlich)

"To err is human, but to really foul things up you need a computer."  [lol2]

Why am I getting a sinking feeling about now tuning my car with a computer? . . . . .  :o

Cheers, Edouard  [cheers1]
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: Bull Winkus on June 01, 2016, 07:10:44 AM
Quote
Why am I getting a sinking feeling about now tuning my car with a computer? . . . . .  :o

 [lol2]

I think you'll be alright, as long as you don't leave the computer in charge while driving. Aaaa? I can see it now?

[smoky effect to start dream sequence]

[Open to Edouard in backseat of classic station wagon]

"Siri! How many time do I have to tell you to not throttle down so hard? You're going to blow the transmission!"

"I'm sorry, Edouard. But I'm trying to retune the engine. I am detecting a slight ping which may be indicating preignition."

"That's not a ping, you idiot! That was the alert sound for that text message I just got!"

"I'm sorry Edouard. Your assumption is invalid. My sensors indicated a distinct ping."

"Yes! Ping is the alert tone!"

[Long pause]

"Would you like me to change the alert tone to Sosumi?"

"Sigh, ? no. Are we there yet?"

 [cheers1]
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: Blicj11 on June 01, 2016, 08:43:45 AM
Ha ha ha ha. Chalk another one up for Herb.
Title: Computers
Post by: dfw_pilot on June 01, 2016, 08:48:42 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kHa3WNerjU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kHa3WNerjU)
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: xairbusdriver on June 01, 2016, 03:57:41 PM
dfw, to be fair (to the 'computer') the "human" did deactivate some computer systems so he could demonstrate his superior knowledge and skills... as the company's (ex)test pilot, I think. "You can't make things idiot-proof. There are simply too many idiots around!" Aviate, Navigate, Communicate. It's not a two out of three choice. [banghead]
Title: Computers
Post by: dfw_pilot on June 01, 2016, 04:32:37 PM
 ;) Yeah, I wasn't being completely fair with that video, but it was the first thing I thought of when I heard of connecting computers to vehicles!
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: xairbusdriver on June 01, 2016, 05:11:53 PM
Quote
I wasn't being completely fair
Don't worry, the forums computer will take care of things. Don't worry, the forums computer will take care of things. Don't worry, the forums computer will take care of things. ...will take care of things. ...will take care of things. ...things. Nuthing kan goe rong, Dave.
Title: 747-8
Post by: dfw_pilot on June 01, 2016, 05:25:58 PM
LOL!

Flying the 747-8 is all by wire and we even have a flare-assist module that makes the 32 foot longer airplane flare like it's a -400 model for a common type rating. It's inching closer to the bus, however, when my right and left thumbs both go  "click, click" - "click, click" I can get us outta Dodge if necessary (or so I think).
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: Bull Winkus on June 01, 2016, 05:45:19 PM
I love that voice at the end going, "Aaa, oh no, oh no, oh no?"

I think he might be remembering some of his, not ready for prime time, code.

 [biggrin], I mean, poor guy?

EDIT: I just read the text for the video. I thought it was just an errant test flight. I didn't know it was carrying passengers, or I wouldn't have been so flippant. Please forgive me.
Title: Foolproofing technology . . . (Re: Longest computer up time?)
Post by: elagache on June 01, 2016, 11:13:20 PM
Dear Herb, Blick, dfw, X-Air, and WeatherCat technologists, . . .

Quote
Why am I getting a sinking feeling about now tuning my car with a computer? . . . . .  :o

I think you'll be alright, as long as you don't leave the computer in charge while driving. Aaaa? I can see it now?

*Sigh*, that's a little too late!  My trusty wagon doesn't have 1 computer but 2!  The engine control unit is a computer and the air conditioner is also controlled by a computer.  As long as this thread is hopelessly off-topic, there is a quick video of my trusty wagon starting:

https://youtu.be/bVoqF1zhAHQ (https://youtu.be/bVoqF1zhAHQ)

If you look at the far corner of the engine bay behind the air cleaner, you can see the engine control unit and the LED status lights.  When the engine starts you can see all the activity.  So indeed it is too late.  My trusty wagon is definitely computer-controlled at this point.

"You can't make things idiot-proof. There are simply too many idiots around!"

But I thought it was a Murphy-ism that:  "You can't make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious!" . . .  :o

I'd like to return this thread to its originally scheduled programming (http://www.canebas.org/WeatherCat/Forum_support_documents/Custom_emoticons/tune_in_TV_emoticon.gif), but I fear this might well be impossible! . . .  (http://www.canebas.org/WeatherCat/Forum_support_documents/Custom_emoticons/dazed_smiley.gif)

Cheers, Edouard  [cheers1]
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: xairbusdriver on June 02, 2016, 12:09:12 AM
OK, nice vid! I especially enjoyed the running commentary! And the magically turning page by the MBP was neat!

What is the pressure gauge(?) on the firewall, just inside of the brake reservoirs/cylinders? Vacuum? AC vapor on the way back to the compressor? Frapilator vapor pressure?
Title: When you are a "one-man band" (Re: Longest computer up time?)
Post by: elagache on June 03, 2016, 12:07:36 AM
Dear X-Air and WeatherCat technical cinematographers,

OK, nice vid! I especially enjoyed the running commentary! And the magically turning page by the MBP was neat!

I actually have quite a few videos like this - I have no choice.  I have to do all this tuning by myself.  Normally you have one person operate the car and a second person using the laptop making adjustments.  Since I'm the only person can drive the car safely and also the only person who understands the tuning software, I've got make a test, videotape it, and then look over the results afterwards to see what needs to be changed.

What is the pressure gauge(?) on the firewall, just inside of the brake reservoirs/cylinders? Vacuum? AC vapor on the way back to the compressor? Frapilator vapor pressure?

That's the pressure of the gasoline.  In a modern fuel injection system, you run a pump in the gas tank that supplies fuel at a high enough pressure so that when an injector opens, it squirts the fuel into a mist.  The injector dictates the required pressure.  On my trusty wagon, the system requires fuel at 43 psi.

My wagon also shares an unexpected feature with modern cars: the fuel line loop.  Since the injectors aren't opening all the time, what happens to the fuel when the injectors are closed?  On modern cars (and backfitted on my wagon) there is a pressure regulator and when fuel isn't needed by the fuel injection system, it flows down a return line back into the fuel tank.  That way there is always sufficient gas available for the injectors.  Whatever gas isn't used is returned to the fuel tank.

Cheers, Edouard
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: xairbusdriver on June 03, 2016, 03:27:07 AM
Quote
...fuel line loop... ...pressure regulator...
Thanks for the explanation. Probably safe than a simple accumulator and more accurate/constant pressure. I had no idea that the pump in the tank put out that much pressure! :o
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: Michel on June 14, 2016, 06:59:06 PM
Hi xairbus,

after a long period of absence from this forum  I stumbled across your uptime question and couldn't resist...

Maybe should be a Poll?

Good idea  [tup]

Quote
So, the question is; What is the longest time you've had a nonstop running computer?

Since you are not referring to a particular hardware or OS, here are the first lines of the
output of my DIGITAL AlphaServer DS10 running OpenVMS 8.3 - the uptime is shown in days,
hours, minutes and seconds in the upper right corner...

 (http://michelswunderland.de/pixforeign/upt.png)


Quote
Second question might be, who cares?!

A lot of people in manufacturing, health care, electric power plants, banks, stock exchanges etc. do...
And I do as well :-) I simply prefer the beasts to run and do the work for me over having to play nanny for them.

  Regards !

   Michel
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: xairbusdriver on June 15, 2016, 12:48:55 AM
I'll agree, restarts/reboots can be a drag, but I'm willing to bet that most  systems demanding continuos time stamping will be running duplicate/triplicate/multi-cate systems with non-conflicting, single system maintenance schedules. Or, maybe not!  [banghead]

I notice that this system decided to disregard such things as "months" and "years", possibly for the same reasons I did. ;)

However, based one questions about "time" in another thread here (<time measuring difficulties (http://athena.trixology.com/index.php?topic=2194.msg20479;topicseen#msg20479)>), even using "day" may be fraught with inconsistencies! Exactly what is the definition of a "day" on these systems?
(http://i1327.photobucket.com/albums/u666/xAirbusDriver/Thinking_zps6auyy8fj.gif)
(http://i1327.photobucket.com/albums/u666/xAirbusDriver/inspect_zpsjshrrngb.gif)
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: dfw_pilot on June 15, 2016, 12:50:26 AM
Seconds from the Epoch?
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: xairbusdriver on June 15, 2016, 01:32:24 AM
Quote
Seconds from the Epoch?
Probably, but considering the fact that a day is actually longer than the "standard" 86400 seconds, ererz accumulate like dust on my desktop! :blush: That's why I removed my original calculations that included Years/Months/Days/Hours/Seconds. With even a day being not an integer value in a "day", how can we then interpolate a "month" or even a "year"?! Even in the 17th Century, it became obvious that the 24/7/365 "standard" wasn't working correctly. The "solution" was to create a "leap day" every so often. [banghead]

It seems the "DIGITAL AlphaServer DS10 running OpenVMS 8.3" didn't bother with trying to go further than "Days", even though it could end up with a rather large number! ;)
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: Michel on June 15, 2016, 05:51:55 AM
Oh well... What have I done ? :-)

To answer the more or less simple question regarding epoch and its friends first:

With Unix applications, the epoch begins 1-Jan-1970 00:00:00.00 UTC. (1970-01-01T00:00:00Z)
With OpenVMS, the system base date is 17-Nov-1858 00:00:00.00 (local) (1858-11-17T00:00:00)

OpenVMS uses local time as the system time, unlike Mac OS X. This design flaw
dates back to software and hardware decisions made when the platform was conceived,
back in 1975. A 64-bit value for the time was quite foresighted for that time.
Unix has an analogous error in its use of a longword for its basic time value ?
but the lack of timezone support is definitely among the larger design flaws in
OpenVMS.

It should be clear how the system clock's seconds evolve from a particular
number of processor cycles - and subsequently minutes, hours and days.

If I got you right, the question is how this systems does handle days or to be
more precise "calendar days". This arises the question :

"To leap or not to leap..."

In fact, there are not only leap years, there are also leap seconds.
DIGITAL once (1983) was asked by a customer why they considered the year
2000 to be a leap year - because he suspected this was wrong. Here's
the answer which points out that OpenVMS makes use of the Gregorian calendar
and hence also clarifies how this system does handle (calendar) days:


                   ******DEC INTERNAL USE ONLY******             
 
SPR NUMBER:                  11-60903
 
ANSWER CATEGORY:             UE
MAINTENANCE HOURS:           1
DUPLICATE PROBLEM:           N
DUPLICATE SPR NUMBER(S):     
 
OPERATING SYSTEM:            VAX/VMS             
O.S. VERSION:                V3.2
PRODUCT:                     VAX/VMS
PRODUCT VERSION:             V3.2
COMPONENT:                   Run-Time Library
SUB-COMPONENT:               LIB$ routines
 
DATE ANSWERED:               13-Oct-1983
 
MAINTAINER:                  Stanley Rabinowitz
 
ATTACHMENT:                  N
 
PUBLICATION INSTRUCTIONS:    N
 
SPR PROBLEM ABSTRACT:        User claims year 2000 should not be a leap year.
 
TITLE:                       -
PUBLICATIONS:                -
ADDITIONAL O.S. VERSIONS:
ADDITIONAL PRODUCT VERSIONS:
COMPONENT SEQUENCE NUMBER:   
SUPERSEDES:                   
TYPE OF ARTICLE:             
 
                            ANSWER CATEGORIES
 
CG=1=CORRECTION GIVEN       RS=5=RESTRICTION              SG=9=SUGGESTION
FN=2=FIXED IN NEXT RELEASE  CS=6=CUSTOMER SUPPORTED       IQ=10=INQUIRY
DE=3=DOCUMENTATION ERROR    NR=7=NON-REPRODUCIBLE         HW=11=HARDWARE
UE=4=USER ERROR             II=8=INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION
 
                            TYPE OF ARTICLE
 
F=OPTIONAL FEATURE PATCH    N=NOTE
M=MANDATORY PATCH           R=RESTRICTION
 
                         FOR MAINTENANCE USE
 
 
 
 
 
                     ******END OF DEC USE ONLY******
 
                            D I G I T A L
 
                           SPR ANSWER FORM
 
SPR NO. 11-60903
 
 
           SYSTEM   VERSION   PRODUCT   VERSION   COMPONENT
SOFTWARE:  VAX/VMS  V3.2      VAX/VMS   V3.2      Run-Time Library
 
 
 
PROBLEM:
 
The LIB$DAY Run-Time Library service "incorrectly"  assumes  the  year
2000 is a leap year.
 
 
RESPONSE:
 
Thank you for your forward-looking SPR.
 
Various system services, such as SYS$ASCTIM assume that the year  2000
will  be  a  leap  year.   Although one can never be sure of what will
happen at some future time, there is strong historical  precedent  for
presuming  that the present Gregorian calendar will still be in affect
by the year 2000.  Since we also hope that VMS will still be around by
then, we have chosen to adhere to these precedents.
 
The purpose of a calendar is to reckon time in advance,  to  show  how
many  days  have  to  elapse  until a certain event takes place in the
future, such as the harvest or the release of VMS  V4.   The  earliest
calendars,  naturally,  were  crude  and  tended  to be based upon the
seasons or the lunar cycle.
 
The calendar of the Assyrians, for example, was based upon the  phases
of  the  moon.  They knew that a lunation (the time from one full moon
to the next) was 29 1/2 days long, so their lunar year had a  duration
of [354] days.   This  fell  short of the solar year by about 11 days.
(The exact time for the solar year is approximately 365 days, 5 hours,
48  minutes,  and  46  seconds.)  After 3 years, such a lunar calendar
would be off by a whole month, so the Assyrians added an  extra  month
from  time  to time to keep their calendar in synchronization with the
seasons.
 
The best approximation that was possible in antiquity  was  a  19-year
period, with 7 of these 19 years having 13 months (leap months).  This
scheme was adopted as the basis for the religious calendar used by the
Jews.   (The  Arabs  also  used  this  calendar until Mohammed forbade
shifting from 12 months to 13 months.)
 
When Rome emerged as a world  power,  the  difficulties  of  making  a
calendar  were  well  known,  but  the  Romans complicated their lives
because of their superstition that even numbers were  unlucky.   Hence
their  months were 29 or 31 days long, with the exception of February,
which had 28 days.  Every second year, the Roman calendar included  an
extra  month  called  Mercedonius of 22 or 23 days to keep up with the
solar year.
 
Even this algorithm was very poor, so that in 45 BC,  Caesar,  advised
by  the  astronomer Sosigenes, ordered a sweeping reform.  By imperial
decree, one year was made 445 days long to bring the calendar back  in
step  with  the  seasons.  The new calendar, similar to the one we now
use was called the Julian calendar (named after Julius Caesar).   It's
months  were  30 or 31 days in length and every fourth year was made a
leap year (having 366 days).  Caesar also decreed that the year  would
start with the first of January, not the vernal equinox in late March.
 
Caesar's year was 11 1/2 minutes short of the calculations recommended
by  Sosigenes  and  eventually the date of the vernal equinox began to
drift.  Roger Bacon became alarmed and sent a note to Pope Clement IV,
who  apparently  was  not  impressed.   Pope  Sixtus  IV  later became
convinced that  another  reform  was  needed  and  called  the  German
astronomer,  Regiomontanus,  to  Rome  to  advise him.  Unfortunately,
Regiomontanus died of the plague shortly thereafter and the plans died
as well.
 
In 1545, the Council of Trent authorized Pope Gregory XIII  to  reform
the  calendar  once  more.   Most of the mathematical work was done by
Father Christopher Clavius, S.J.  The immediate  correction  that  was
adopted  was  that Thursday, October 4, 1582 was to be the last day of
the Julian calendar.  The next  day  was  Friday,  with  the  date  of
October  15.   For  long  range  accuracy,  a formula suggested by the
Vatican librarian Aloysius Giglio was adopted.   It  said  that  every
fourth  year  is  a  leap  year  except for century years that are not
divisible by 400.  Thus 1700, 1800 and 1900 would not be  leap  years,
but  2000  would  be a leap year since 2000 is divisible by 400.  This
rule eliminates 3 leap years every 4 centuries,  making  the  calendar
sufficiently  correct  for  most  ordinary purposes.  This calendar is
known as the Gregorian calendar and is the one that we now use  today.
(It  is  interesting  to note that in 1582, all the Protestant princes
ignored the papal decree and so many countries continued  to  use  the
Julian  calendar  until either 1698 or 1752.  In Russia, it needed the
revolution to introduce the Gregorian calendar in 1918.)
 
This explains why VMS chooses to treat the year 2000 as a leap year.
 
Despite the great accuracy of the Gregorian calendar, it  still  falls
behind very slightly every few years.  If you are very concerned about
this problem, we suggest that you tune in  short  wave  radio  station
WWV,  which  broadcasts  official  time  signals for use in the United
States.  About once every 3 years, they declare a leap second at which
time  you  should be careful to adjust your system clock.  If you have
trouble picking up their signals, we suggest you  purchase  an  atomic
clock (not manufactured by Digital and not a VAX option at this time).
 
 
                         END OF SPR RESPONSE
 
Mon 17-Oct-1983 11:15 EDT / Nina Eppes, R2ME2::EPPES, 381-2175, ZKO2-3/K06
--

Is that enough of an explanation ? :-)

 Regards !
 
    Michael


Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: Michel on June 15, 2016, 07:07:09 AM
I overlooked this one with my previous answer:

I'll agree, restarts/reboots can be a drag, but I'm willing to bet that most  systems demanding continuos time stamping will be running duplicate/triplicate/multi-cate systems with non-conflicting, single system maintenance schedules. Or, maybe not!  [banghead]

Hook, line and sinker, xairbus !

In the VMS world the related heading is "Cluster".
There are identically named functions in the *nix and Win world which must not be
confused with VMS clustering. VMS clustering means full access to any ressource
(no matter if hard- or software) on any node worlwide being a member of a given
VMS Cluster. Say you can access a remote system's HDD or DVD or tape drives just
as if they would be sitting in the computer beneath your desk. Furthermore you can
upgrade single Cluster members while the other nodes will continue to service  the
users without any sign of downtime.

The above is a tad abstract, so here is a report from real life:

=======================================================

If cluster uptimes are going to be boasted about, here is our story.

We are running several major applications for the Regio Politie Amsterdam-Amstelland
(compare Greater Amsterdam Police). Call room, Criminal Investigation,
Recognation Service etc. are really in demand 7*24!

April 13 1997 (sunday morning) after a lot of planning and preparing to allow
for offline-police services, there was a 'big bang' total network upgrade,
which interrupted the online services for several hours. We (the VMS group)
took the opportunity to go down and do various changes that are so much more
cumbersome to perform "rolling". At that time the cluster consisted of 2
Alpha 2100's and a VaxStation 4000-90, running VMS 6.2-1H3 (some sopporting
programs were available only on VAX, they were to be replaced by different
ways to do them). In june 1997 a third 2100 was added. In march 1999 we did a
rolling upgrade from V6.2 to 7.1-1H2. A major change came in may 1999 when a
second location (7 KM away) was activated. An FDDI ring was established.
A test system (Alpha 1200) was configured into the cluster, and moved to the
other (the "dark") site. Then 2 2100 were removed, tranported over, and added
again. The 1200 left again.

The hardest part was explaining to management that we didn't go down for the move.

September 2000 an ES40 was added. February 2001 VMS went from 7.1-1H2 to 7.2-1;
the VaxStation was no longer needed and left. In may the "intestines" of the
2100's were moved into 2100A's to satisfy more PCI need. December 2002/january
2003 saw the upgrade to VMS 7.3-1, to prepare for the big change: the 2100A's
were to be replaced and a SAN deployed. After adding 2 ES45's and an ES40,
the data was moved from the HSZ40-connected SCSI disks to (HSG80-connected)SAN.
Over 850 concealed devices, moved at moments when a specific device was unused.
Only 5 of those had to be forced by deliberately breaking availability during
the SLA-specified "potential maintenance window", 0:30-1:00.
Thereafter the 2100A's and the old disks were removed. So now we are running a
cluster with uptime 2420 days, in which the oldest hardware (FDDI concentrators)
is only 1650 days, and the oldest system's age is less half that of the cluster
uptime. Daily peak concurrent usage is some 600+ interactive users, 50+ batch
jobs, 30+ network jobs, and 180+ detached processes ("other mode", mostly
call-room service processes and the server-end of the radio-connected
MobileDataTerminals in the policecars) Even more interesting, because the
signify the need to not go down: weekly LOW usage is some 50+ interactive,
40+ batch, 20+ net, and 170+ detached. The total environment is far from
unchanging: about twice a month some or other application is upgraded (most
support rolling upgrades), and there are about 100-150 mutations in personnel,
and some 200-300 application (de-)autorizations per week.
All this is maintained by only 3 people: Frank Wagenaar (full time)
Anton van Ruitenbeek (40%) and myself (full time).

=======================================================

I think this shows what well-thought hardware and OS design is able to accomplish
and that you are right in that it takes more than a single Computer to deliver permanent
service...

In this connection... the "disaster proof video" is a must see:
http://brightcove.vo.llnwd.net/e1/uds/pd/1160438707001/1160438707001_3492507031001_Disaster-Proof-MPEG2-3BZ7.mp4?pubId=4119874060001&videoId=4657542628001


 Regards !
 
   Michel

Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: xairbusdriver on June 15, 2016, 05:14:24 PM
Which one of those guys was you?! [lol]

BTW, Ouachita County, Arkansas is the home of the <Arkansas Law Enforcement Training Academy (http://www.clest.org)>, probably the actual location for this "disaster".

I'm impressed (even though no macOS [note new designation protocol] software was used)! However, the credulity of the video is stretched a bit by the claim that "no animals" were harmed, despite Blaze, Sparky, and Little Smokey 'returning' to their aquarium. I find it extremely hard to believe that those fish were not harmed by having such horrible 'puny' names!!! Obviously, HP has no concern for the mental cruelty to Animalia: Chordata: Pisces!!
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: Blicj11 on June 15, 2016, 05:55:29 PM
Great video. So happy for the fish.
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: Bull Winkus on June 15, 2016, 09:46:06 PM
That video reminded me of the TV show, Dragnet for some odd reason.

Great thread, guys! Enjoyed the read on "why VMS chooses to treat the year 2000 as a leap year." Best and most detailed explanation I've seen, so far.

 [cheers1]
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: Blicj11 on June 15, 2016, 09:49:30 PM
Great thread, guys! Enjoyed the read on "why VMS chooses to treat the year 2000 as a leap year." Best and most detailed explanation I've seen, so far.

Amen! Thanks for a pleasant read and the requirement for a healthy think.
Title: Best to reboot before kernel panic! (Re: Longest computer up time?)
Post by: elagache on June 15, 2016, 11:32:54 PM
Dear X-Air, dfw, and WeatherCat computer science observers,

Seconds from the Epoch?

That is the UNIX standard and because of that we will have yet another Y2K mess in 2032.  Here is a Wikipedia article about it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_2038_problem (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_2038_problem)

Of course, there are good reasons to reboot your computer from time to time.  I was getting desperately short of memory yesterday but I had a ton of things to do so I kept right on working . . . . . until my computer crashed with a kernel panic!   [banghead]

Oh well, . . . . Edouard
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: xairbusdriver on June 16, 2016, 03:27:01 AM
Quote
until my computer crashed with a kernel panic!
Obviously not one of those HP servers... "I need more nodes... or was it <more cowbell (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GCd0OjjCz88)>?"
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: Michel on June 16, 2016, 09:16:09 AM
Quote from: xairbusdriver
Which one of those guys was you?! [lol]
I would have loved been the director, but... much to my chagrin I wasn't involved with it all.  :(

Quote
BTW, Ouachita County, Arkansas is the home of the <Arkansas Law Enforcement Training Academy (http://www.clest.org)>,
probably the actual location for this "disaster".

'Interesting' institution/authority.

Quote
I'm impressed (even though no macOS [note new designation protocol] software was used)!

Probably like I was by the Mac and its ease of use when I acquired it compared
to what I previously was used to at work produced in Redmond ...
"There is something fishy in the Pacific Northwest, but it ain't Salmon"  ;D
Well, every system has its pros and cons.

Quote
However, the credulity of the video is stretched a bit by the claim that
"no animals" were harmed, despite Blaze, Sparky, and Little Smokey 'returning'
to their aquarium. I find it extremely hard to believe that those fish were not
harmed by having such horrible 'puny' names!!!

No objections, nothing to add on my part.  [tup]
Glad we seem to share the same kind of humour.

Quote
Obviously, HP has no concern for the mental cruelty to Animalia: Chordata: Pisces!!

Excellent biological classification, xairbus !
But then, HP has no concern for the mental cruelty to mankind either
given parts of their portfolio...

Quote from: Bull Winkus
Enjoyed the read on "why VMS chooses to treat the year 2000 as a leap year."
Best and most detailed explanation I've seen, so far.

I absolutely do agree. DIGITAL always delivered substantiated answers
to customer/user requests/complaints.
In another answer they explain why OpenVMS regards November 17, 1858 as
the beginning of time:
 
   The modified Julian date adopted by SAO (Smithsonian
   Astrophysical Observatory) for satellite tracking is Julian Day
   2400000, which turns out to be November 17, 1858.
 
   SAO started tracking satellites with an 8K (nonvirtual) 36-bit
   IBM 704 in 1957 when Sputnik went into orbit. The Julian
   day was 2435839 on January 1, 1957. This is 11225377 octal,
   which was too big to fit into an 18-bit field. With only 8K
   of memory, the 14 bits left over by keeping the Julian date
   in its own 36-bit word would have been wasted. They also
   needed the fraction of the current day (for which 18 bits gave
   enough accuracy), so it was decided to keep the number of
   days in the left 18 bits and the fraction of a day in the right
   18 bits of one word.
 
   Eighteen bits allows the truncated Julian day (the SAO day)
   to grow as large as 262143, which from November 17, 1858,
   allowed for 7 centuries. Possibly, the date could only grow as
   large as 131071 (using 17 bits), but this still covers 3 centuries
   and leaves the possibility of representing negative time. The
   1858 date preceded the oldest star catalogue in use at SAO,
   which also avoided having to use negative time in any of the
   satellite tracking calculations.


Quote from: elagache
Quote from: dfw_pilot
Seconds from the Epoch?
That is the UNIX standard and because of that we will have yet another Y2K mess in 2032. 

2032 ? Sure ?

I'd tend to believe it's 2038, since the Unix Epoch is a 32- or 64-bit value
(long-/quadword, eventually unsigned; best as time_t) containing the number of
seconds since 01-JAN-1970 00:00, UTC. When interpreted as signed and unsigned
longword values, the upper bound for the C epoch is 19-Jan-2038 03:14:07 GMT or
7-Feb-2106 06:28:15 GMT, respectively.

Time on VMS is a 64-bit (quadword, eight-byte, little-endian) value
containing the numbers of 100 nanosecond intervals since 17-NOV-1858 00:00 (local).
This value is updated every 1/100 sec and its usage is common across the VAX,
Alpha and I64 Integrity Itanium platforms.
This quadword format works up through 31-Jul-31086 02:48:05.47 GMT.

But what is the year 31086 worth if the command line interface/interpreter
only can cope with 4 digits for the year ?  [rolleyes2]
Well, I guess engineering will take care of that in about 7975 years  [runoff]

 Regards !
 
   Michel

Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: xairbusdriver on June 16, 2016, 04:41:26 PM
Quote
I guess engineering will take care of that in about 7975 years
Sounds like you were in management!! [banghead]

"After all, 'programming' is really just typing. What's your problem?!" [rolleyes2] [rockon] [lol]

Quote
Glad we seem to share the same kind of humour.
At my age, a sense of humor is one of the few that still works! [rockon]
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: Bull Winkus on June 16, 2016, 07:13:14 PM
Another good one for sure! "why OpenVMS regards November 17, 1858 as
the beginning of time:"

I glean from it that all of these original format decisions were tied to necessary compromises in order to get the most out of what is still a somewhat limited means of measuring something as nearly infinite as engineers have ever encountered. Not being a professional programmer though, I wonder, why must the tracking word be on the smallest division of time? Why track bottom up, when the key word could be in hours from the epoch with all smaller divisions derived from calculation? There must be a reason, and I'm willing to bet that you know it.  ;)

 [cheers1]
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: Michel on June 16, 2016, 10:24:11 PM
Quote from: xairbusdriver
Quote
I guess engineering will take care of that in about 7975 years
Sounds like you were in management!! [banghead]
[lol]
You know I meant to play a silly joke (on management)  ;)

Quote
At my age, a sense of humor is one of the few that still works!
And I'm willing to bet you are doing quite well at all given your postings here.
Despite your age - at least I hope so !

Quote from: Bull Winkus
Not being a professional programmer though,

I'm one neither...

Quote
I wonder, why must the tracking word be on the smallest division of time?
Why track bottom up, when the key word could be in hours from the epoch with
all smaller divisions derived from calculation?
There must be a reason, and I'm willing to bet that you know it.  ;)

In fact, I never bothered. But there are quite a few aspects...

Much like the randomness associated with different sorts of random number
generation and thus different uses and varying risks, there can be different
uses for differing precisions and differing accuracies of time.

Basically the fine gradation of nanoseconds is needed for process handling,
synchronisation and related operations. So dividing hours on the fly would
be..um.. counterproductive :)

If you want to know why applications want or need higher precision or higher accuracy,
that varies (precision describes random errors, a measure of statistical variability,
while accuracy describes systematic errors, a measure of statistical bias).

A 1/100 second is quite some instructions on contemporary processors -- in terms
of raw speed, a hundred trillion instructions per second or more is theoretically
possible -- though it would have to be stupid-simple and cache-resident to sustain
anywhere near that rate -- with a current x86-64 CPU running some
stupid-simple-dumb-fast cache-based application. For comparison, the classic
VAX-11/780 ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VAX-11 ) supposedly did a million
instructions per second with its 5 MHz clock  -- if memory serves me correctly
(non pun intended ;-) , it probably did about half that, but the instructions supposedly
performed about the same work as an IBM mainframe running a million instructions.
Nowadays Itanium can waste the equivalent of ~15000 instructions for an alignment fault.
SSD I/O rates run the range to as many as one or even ten million IOPS. 
Network connections and data rates are vastly faster, too.

http://people.eecs.berkeley.edu/~rcs/research/interactive_latency.html

 Regards !

   Michel
Title: Sorry typo (Re: Longest computer up time?)
Post by: elagache on June 16, 2016, 11:01:35 PM
Dear X-Air, Michel, Herb, and WeatherCat speed forum posters,

Quote from: elagache
That is the UNIX standard and because of that we will have yet another Y2K mess in 2032. 

2032 ? Sure ?

You are correct.  I was typing too quickly.  The Wikipedia link is correct and lists 2038 as the "witching hour."

Never enough time to deal with all these forums . . . .  :(

Edouard
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: Bull Winkus on June 17, 2016, 06:04:07 AM
Well, thanks for your insight Michel! I feel considerably enlightened, even though I still don't know? so? much.

I understand the need for timing precision within computer operations. I just don't understand the necessity of counting centi-seconds from the beginning of an epoch to the end, when for the purpose of linking all of those centi-seconds to human time, an hour based count would do.

It probably has a lot to do with core legacy issues. Meaning, if it ain't broke, don't fix it!  [rockon]

 [cheers1]
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: Michel on June 17, 2016, 01:56:59 PM
Quote from: Bull Winkus
I just don't understand the necessity of counting centi-seconds from the beginning of an epoch to the end,
when for the purpose of linking all of those centi-seconds to human time, an hour based count would do.

I'm not sure whether I do understand you correctly...
A sort of chicken/egg problem perhaps ?

There is no 'necessity' to count centi-seconds for presenting the user with
a time. The related routines simply make use of what is existent anyway
on a given system (because it's needed for other operations) instead of
'reinventing the wheel' by introducing a further hour-based mechanism which
would put additional (read: needless) load onto the processor, memory and
mass storage.

IOW, it's easier to both use and maintain existing mechanisms instead of adding
not really needed ones.

I'm still not sure I got your point...

  Michel

Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: Bull Winkus on June 17, 2016, 10:36:43 PM
I suppose I'm placing too much emphasis on a need for eliminating the epoch doomsday limit, or future Y2K like issues. Since doing so is possible, I feel like it should be done. But, that ignores the amount of effort that might be involved, which could be very substantial.

You see, initially upon discovery of the Y2K issue, I was aghast that the architects of DOS would overlook the issue of such a shortcut in linking a limited system clock to time management. I felt that it was short sighted. I still feel that any century based term limit of such foundational programming is short sighted, because eventually (even though perhaps not in the programmer's lifetime) dealing with the limit will create an enormous work load for the developer community.

It struck me, however, that for the purpose of time and date management rather than incrementing in centi-seconds for the extent of the limits of the size of the word (64 bit?), that the word could increment in hours or uptick every 360,000 centi-seconds. Or better yet, since processor cycles and memory availability is so abundant, perhaps a separate word could be created that would be incremented by the system clock word at 360,000 count intervals, that could be linked to by higher level language for interpretation of time and date and whose epoch would be measured in thousands of years. But, I think that to do that a second additional word would have to be used to count up to 360,000 before resetting for the purpose of offering programmers greater than 1 hour precision in their calculations without linking to the original system clock. ? Whew! ? That's all.

 [sweat2]

But, it's really an academic question. The current revision of the calendar has only been in force for 434 years, so perhaps the question is as relevant as staring into the reflecting pool while musing about appearance and observation.

 [cheers1]
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: Michel on June 17, 2016, 11:47:46 PM
Quote from: Bull Winkus
I suppose I'm placing too much emphasis on a need for eliminating the epoch doomsday limit, or future Y2K like issues.


I don't think so. You are simply right this should be rectified.

Quote
You see, initially upon discovery of the Y2K issue, I was aghast that the architects of DOS would overlook the issue of such a shortcut in linking a limited system clock to time management.

Let's face it, 30 or 25 years ago computer and software manufacturers were fighting other fires...
Hence they didn't focus on things they weren't affected by directly. Unfortunately, this POV hasn't changed much  :(

Quote
I felt that it was short sighted.

Welcome to the club !

Quote
It struck me, however, that for the purpose of time and date management rather than incrementing in centi-seconds for the extent of the limits of the size of the word (64 bit?), that the word could increment in hours or uptick every 360,000 centi-seconds. Or better yet, since processor cycles and memory availability is so abundant, perhaps a separate word could be created that would be incremented by the system clock word at 360,000 count intervals, that could be linked to by higher level language for interpretation of time and date and whose epoch would be measured in thousands of years. But, I think that to do that a second additional word would have to be used to count up to 360,000 before resetting for the purpose of offering programmers greater than 1 hour precision in their calculations without linking to the original system clock. ? Whew! ? That's all.

I think I've got you now. Thanks for the comprehensive description.
That's an indeed interesting approach.

Quote
But, it's really an academic question.

I tend to agree - especially when the system clock sucks (again) in the more or less near future
due to the known *nix Epoch limitations, the extra hour-based time value being valid until the
year xxxxxx won't help...

Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: Blicj11 on June 18, 2016, 01:00:01 AM
Wonderful, unique photo for your banner, Michel.
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: Bull Winkus on June 18, 2016, 03:42:08 AM
Thanks for listening Michel. Glad I could get that off my chest!

 [lol2]
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: xairbusdriver on January 19, 2017, 10:43:33 PM
Software Up-Time: 52 days, 3 hrs, 33 mins
OS update in progress. Mainly for the Security update to catch the ?Fruitfly? malware. As long as there are these types of updates, I don't think Mac users will set any records! OTOH, keeping things updated, especially in the security realm, is more important, in my opinion, anyway.

BTW, I tried to post this some ~25 minutes ago, but could not make contact with 'athena.trixology.com'. I've had that problem occasionally, usually several weeks apart, must be a busy server on the 'island'? Or maybe it's Putin tapping into one of the underwater cables...
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: xairbusdriver on February 02, 2017, 12:01:15 AM
How's this for long uptime? (http://www.thewhir.com/blog/this-servers-uptime-puts-your-sla-to-shame?utm_source=WHIR&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=dailynewsletter&NL=WHIR-01&Issue=WHIR-01_20170201_WHIR-01_45&sfvc4enews=42&cl=article_2&utm_rid=CPNET000000113593&elq2=a9556ae0fb1743629475a3df5c4351d9)

24 years!!!

Not running macOS, or even Windows, of course... lol(1)

And the IT Department plans on replacing things in April! "We didn't built/buy it, so it must be replaced! [computer] Don't confuse us with this 'uptime' thing! If we don't have 'downtime', how do we justify our employment?!" [banghead]
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: mcrossley on February 02, 2017, 12:13:49 AM
When I worked for Tandem Computers years ago there were NonStop systems that had been running for around 20 years. How much longer they went on I have no idea.
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: xairbusdriver on February 02, 2017, 12:28:20 AM
I've put a reminder on my calendar on April 2041 to check on how things are working out for the "new" equipment. Probably should wait until the middle of the month or they'll think it's an April Fool's prank! ;)
Title: 2041
Post by: dfw_pilot on February 02, 2017, 12:34:20 AM
LOL
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: xairbusdriver on January 25, 2018, 04:09:17 PM
Anyone used the Security Update 2018-001 for macOS 10.12 Sierra? I've only got 14 days, 17 hrs, 20 mins since my last Restart of the WC mini. [banghead] It's looks like I may never beat the record for continuous uptime for WC... [rolleyes2]
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: Blicj11 on January 25, 2018, 06:20:52 PM
I installed Security Update 2018-001 for Sierra two days ago.
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: dfw_pilot on January 25, 2018, 08:24:17 PM
Are the gauges working on your websites with Sierra installed? If you don't have one, might you add one and see?

I can't currently upgrade beyond El Capitan because the gauges don't work in WC on the website with Sierra or with High, Higher, Highest Sierra.

THANKS!
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: xairbusdriver on January 26, 2018, 12:16:33 AM
They seem to all be working. But it is possible to pull up the page just as WC is uploading new data and discover that a gauge may be missing until the updating finishes. My hosting server must be deleting images before accepting replacements? :o You can view mine at: http://mid-southweather.com/gauges.html (http://mid-southweather.com/gauges.html)
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: dfw_pilot on January 26, 2018, 01:02:08 AM
Sorry to hijack the thread - but thanks for that xAir. Gauges look great! I may need to try an upgrade here soon and see how it goes. Thanks,

dfw/mem

;)
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: xairbusdriver on January 26, 2018, 01:18:11 AM
You'd better hurry, I can see some very busy days ahead for you!! [cheer]
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: xairbusdriver on January 26, 2018, 11:21:42 PM
Quote from: dfw_pilot
Are the gauges working on your websites with Sierra installed? If you don't have one, might you add one and see?
My bad! Furst mizsteak uv thee yeer? [computer] I forgot that the mini running WC is actually still using El Capitan! I'm still using macOS 10.12 Sierra, so my answer about Gauges working on 10.6 are worthless! :blush: [blush] [banghead]
Title: Re: Longest computer up time?
Post by: xairbusdriver on March 31, 2018, 02:44:00 AM
[banghead] Only made it to 36+ days. There's another Restart-Required Security Update out... But I'd probably complain if I got hung with a new rope! cmu:-)
Title: Not bad! (Re: Longest computer up time?)
Post by: elagache on March 31, 2018, 10:19:08 PM
Dear X-Air and WeatherCat endurance seekers,

[banghead] Only made it to 36+ days.

That's nothing to complain about these days.  With my general use Mac, I'm struggling to go 7 days before I have to reboot.  If you leave your Mac alone and just run WeatherCat, you can probably go for many months.  However, even that might depend on how many custom graphs, gauges, and CTWs you have deployed.

So take some satisfaction in getting 36 days!  [tup]

Cheers, Edouard  [cheers1]